@romrom

TL;DR: The #CunninghamLaw is correct, but not for the bitter reasons that OP project over the people helping her.

In fact, such behavior might be quite rational if you consider tradeoffs, thresholds and damage reduction.

You might want to help somebody who ask something you know, but you have limited time (you know, #capitalism, no socially available time...) and energy.
Also the questioner might compete with several others for your answers and you might prioritize more different questions (either because more frequently asked or because deeper and more difficult to figure by herself).
Furthermore, you might delay answering to a particular question because you know many other people could answer and you do not care for fake internet points.

Thus from the questioner perspective, her question is ignored, while in fact it has just been scheduled with lower priority than she desire.

So she post a wrong answer.

Then the same people who knew the correct answer but hadn't the time or energy to answer yet, see the wrong answer and think "wait: what if people follow this **wrong** advice? it will be a mess!"

As you might know, simple erroneous information often spreads way faster than more complex truth!

So they feel urged to answer to reduce damage for other people and the community they care about.

Since wrong infos are often more dangerous than no info, the wrong answer raise the priority of the issue, hacking the community good will.

Obviously the questioner interprets the community's behavior according from her individual (and individualist) perspective, she feels smarter for "exploiting the human nature" or something like that.

In fact, she is exploiting someone who care about the community more then she does.

🤷‍♂️

PS: sorry if I reply in English... but I can't write in French.

@sebsauvage